Re: The Kernel

[Rick Jones <rickya@siservices.net>]

George Bonser wrote:
> 
> Ok, lets get our terminology straight :)
> 
> In my mind there are three parts.
> 
> 1) The linux core
> 2) The distribution base
> 3) The extended distribution
> 
> The linux core is basicly a spec.
> 
> The distribution base is a set of software components and a specification
> including filesystem layout, policy, and package management.
> 
> The extended distribution is all the other components that may or may not
> be installed at any given time that make up the complete distribution.
> 
> No single one of them can exist on its own, it is built upon the one
> before it.
> 
> How is that?

That would be just fine.  If you look at your past sent messages you'll
see that you have been refering to the SEUL base as core.  The core
components of SEUL are the linux core.  If we can all keep that in mind
I think we can avoid argueing about two different things at the same
time.

> Correct.  The problem is, Linux is only the kernel.  We need a name for
> the SEUL Linux Core spec to differentiate it from the SEUL Linux
> distribution. Linux 1.3 is a development kernel now obsolete. How about we
> call it just plain Core?  Core 1.0 compliant?

No.  Maybe in the begining Linux was just a lone kernel but now it is an
entire operating system.  However, I don't see any reason not to just
say core 1.0 compliant.  I do think making the distinction "Linux core
compliant" will avoid confusion between the concept of SEUL's base and
SEUL's core which we have seen is a problem.

> Because they will make a call to uucico, uux, uutraf or some other program
> that DOES know where to find the stuff.  In other words, it does not
> matter if cnews has its configs in /var/lib/news or in /etc/news as long
> as inews and rnews work.  

I think you're wrong here.  If that were the case, then we already have
that and SEUL's reason for making a core standard for all distro's is
not needed.

You are really never going to get other
> commercial distributionsd to change until they are forced to because of
> the economic bottom line.  

That's the point.

It will be baseball in October in Wrigley Field
> before Red Hat adopts dpkg or changes their init structure.  By the same
> token, Debian is not likely to adopt rpm or Red Hat's init structure. Lets
> not doom ourselves from the start.  We can set realistic reachable goals
> and extend them as we improve.

It is important that a standard fromework for installation and package
handling be set.  It won't matter if every distro is compliant if a
vendor has to repackage the same software a dozen times.  How can they
put a CDROM in a box and ship it out if they need to have more clones of
their software on that CDROM than the CDROM can hold?  Are you saying a
vendor should put their software (only) on 2 CDROMS when they can fit
their software and the other obligatory lite and shareware type bundles
on one CDROM?  All because there is no package handling standard in the
Linux world?

Or maybe you think they should dedicate a team of programmers to
research all the different distro's and code their own install program
for their packages?  How is a vendor going to see that as economically
sound?  They want to make money, not spend money on extra CDROM's and
packaging, or hire more programmers for the sole purpose of keeping up
with the different installation schemes.

> Right, Debian already has that.  I think you will find that in the Policy
> Manual.

What does Debian have to do with a file standard?  You've been saying
each distro should be able to put their files wherever they want.  That
was the issue.  If Debian follows what is accepted as the best file
standard, then we should use it as a starting point.  Otherwise we
don't.

> <sigh>  You are repeating what I said. Anyone can create any app, install
> the binary in /usr/local/bin or /opt/<packagename> and, if the correct
> ld.so, libc and other supporting libs are present on the system, it should
> run. If the system is Core 1.0 compliant and the program is Core 1.0
> compliant, the program binary should run. I think we are speaking about
> the same thing here but I am not sure. :) 

No, I don't think we are.  Go and download Enlightenment DR 0.13.2 and
try to install it.  When you can't figure out why it won't even compile,
on Debian hamm, then we'll be talking about the same problem.

  Now, if the vendor wants to
> put it in dpkg format and have the package install ts pieces into the OS
> and register itself in the package management database, we are NOW talking
> about being SEUL Base compliant.  Two different concepts.  If the package
> is SEUL Base compliant, it will be able to warn you when you try to delete
> something that it depends on.  Hopefully, enough vendors will want to be
> SEUL complaint that we start seeing some real software out there for it.

And you don't see why they should all use the same package handling
structure?  Your above paragraph is exactly why it's important.

> This might be the crux of the problem right here.  The core is simply a
> list of things that the base must contain.  The sources for these
> components are available at all the usual Linux FTP sites (sunsite, etc)

What crux? Which problem?

> Here is what core is:
> 
> GCC V???
> ld.so V???
> libc5 V???
> libc6 V???
> Linux V2.0.32
> etc.
> 
> The core is not "bootable" but is a list of components that a bootable
> system claiming Core compliance must contain.

Now you're saying Linux isn't bootable unless it's in a distro?  My
first Linux experience was from those FTP sites, not a distro.  About 3
years ago, when distro's were even more screwed up than they are now.

A distro is just a package of Linux software put together with a Linux
core to make it easier on people to build a good Linux box.  Linux's
core components give you a bootable machine that can run programs.

Tell you what.  When you install Debian you have the option of
installing just a base system in like a 10MB partition.  That is what
Linux is.  Maybe with a few Debian added things.  That is where you
should start looking for what core is.  Strip is down to the bare
essentials to operate and you have it.